| reply to Vamp
Re: [Northeast] High pings / bad routing... Here is a traffic graph I noticed in a router I just installed that is on FiOS...
»www.dropbox.com/s/epgozqopr7e2vt···.php.png
Interesting +100ms spike that never left one random day last week. Not sure what is going on. |
|
guppy_fishPremium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:1 | What are you tracing / ping to/from? |
|
hubrisnxs
join:2009-12-30
Fountain Valley, CA
kudos:1 | dead link for me |
|
| reply to KillABrew
My complaints with Time Warner were due to having around 30ms - 50ms pings to a local server, that was the only issue. With Fios as long as there are no ping spikes my ping is half of what I was getting with Time Warner. My issue with Time Warner was not ping spikes, nothing like what I am currently experiencing with Fios. I am getting lag spikes so severe with Fios that my ping will shoot up to 75ms - 100ms+ and stay there for a while, lag spikes that completely freeze me ingame when they occur. Makes gaming online frustrating, when my ping decides to spike I usually decide to wait until the next day to play, making sure I get online earlier in the day.
--
My Website: »www.xtemu.com
My Speedtest: »www.speedtest.net/result/1218984197.png
|
|
| So Ken I., if I was VZ I would I wouldnt do anything either. To me you have not built a case about the issue. Put the emulation game stuff down for a bit and really research it to understand it and build your case. Yelling Fix It wont get it done.
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKFRSL4wpcY |
|
|
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Vamp
said by guppy_fish:Less traffic on Comcast -to- Google peering, mostly due to much lower average last mile connections speeds
Verizon users, now with the slowest tier of 50mbs can suck the Google peering point dry ...
So now it IS Verizon's fault(due in part to the "Quantum" tiers)? I thought it was 100% the cheap peering partners that weren't meeting their end of the peering agreement in every single case?
All these complaints about horrible latency and packet loss didn't exist on this forum 90 days ago(roughly Nov-Dec 2012)! If the new mantra is that the 'Internet is growing and we must accept it' I'd like to know how could it have changed so drastically in a matter of weeks? :scratches head: It's like someone flipped a switch and here we are a few months later... |
|
jk111
join:2013-01-27
Auburn, NY | Like you said, these issues I'm having with Verizon were non-existant until about a month ago. |
|
guppy_fishPremium
join:2003-12-09
Lakeland, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to serge87
said by serge87:So now it IS Verizon's fault(due in part to the "Quantum" tiers)? I thought it was 100% the cheap peering partners that weren't meeting their end of the peering agreement in every single case?
All these complaints about horrible latency and packet loss didn't exist on this forum 90 days ago
Verizon unleashed potentially 2-4X more bandwidth demand by their 4 million or so FIOS customers, the content sources can't handle the demand at peak times, yes its IS the content source or their ISP and up chain that's the limit, nothing in the FIOS network
You also have things like Netflix, its reported that by the end of the year video streaming ( primarily Nextflix and YouTube ) will by over 50% of the peak traffic, every one comes home and starts watching some sort of video content, this has been increasing at a rate that WILL break the internet as we know it
We have passed a tipping point, its not Verizon in anyway, their network is the single largest network in the US by capacity, the internet and the peering arrangements are not keeping up with demand, which is primarily caused by NetFlix, YouTube and Skype, which has supplanted about 20% of the voice minutes ( measured in billions )
The Internet model was everyone shared in the cost, now you have a few content sources that are disproportionally only pushing bits, its isn't going to work forever and your seeing first hand a global issue that peering is failing as the economic model to keep the internet functional.
Its been is discussion for a decade by people that know about how all this works, the consensus is we are going to have to start having a QOS model, where voice / gaming and other applications get low-latency access and video, which can be buffered and is only one way get the left-over bits
Verizon network is NOT the issue, I have no issues, even at peak times, but I'm not using consumer NetFlix/Gaming/Youtube, which are over-subscribed at the source, not the destination
Oh an there are maybe 5 people moaning about this, out of a couple thousand BBR members that have FIOS |
|
 RolteC0h
join:2001-05-20
Fresh Meadows, NY
kudos:1
1 edit | guppy, that is finally a much more clear and concise explanation of what is really going on.
A few people might be right, including myself when we said that out own PON card or something in the CO has going bad or has become oversubscribed.
I say the above not only because of pings and tracerts, but because I couldn't download a few times in the last two months over 10Mbit/sec, VOD was not perfect, VOD menu's took 5 seconds or more to respond, Verizon said they couldn't figure it out and that there was loss at the OLT..... Downloading made my pings to my first hop and on go from 25 to 300 with packet loss during those few nights. Mind you it wasn't for hours on end, just in spurts. Still ruins everything. Some people like myself have users playing games, parents watching VOD and myself trying to dropbox/remote desktop and share files with the fiance. Everything experiences lag/cut outs and just plain annoyances. But once again, my specific example is rare. That is why I started MRTG graphing to a few hops plus outside peers to graph when things happen.
Edit:
Come to think of it, I haven't checked my graphs in a while. Busy with work/family. But looking at my charts towards 4 different FiOS connections, they all have the same spikes around the same time every single night. My first hop graph looks normal, my second hop ping chart is showing the same spikes. |
|
| reply to KillABrew
Do I know you from somewhere? Just asking since you posted my name and the initial of my last name. Then again probably not since I nearly forgot my website is in my signature and my whois details are in view for the whole world to see.
I would contact Verizon if I didn't feel it was such a waste and would actually lead to a solution. Plus it's hard for me to get on the phone since I have symptoms of autism which makes it hard for me to verbalize, have productive conversations and socialize in general. The prime reason why I never ever use voice chat in game. If contacting Verizon online was sufficient enough I'd go that route since I have no issues expressing anything in text form.
--
My Website: »www.xtemu.com
My Speedtest: »www.speedtest.net/result/1218984197.png
|
|
| Just doing recon, sir. Right now I know more about you than your issue.
I am just asking that you do some research, understand it, and adjust if needed. I provided you a starting point a few comments back and you have not posted anything back since regarding your issue. Do your research, provide your facts, and we maybe able to help you out. |
|
RolteC0h
join:2001-05-20
Fresh Meadows, NY
kudos:1 | Just noticed my problematic second hop just changed in my traceroutes. Now I get 3-4ms not 8ms to the second hop/most going forward. Lets see what this means tonight and going forward.... |
|
| reply to KillABrew
Can you please be a bit less vague? Earlier in the thread I did provide numerous trace routes, ping test and speed test results. So what do I need to provide to Verizon for them to look into and fix this issue? I understand the lag spikes are due to congestion either through some peering provider or the Verizon routers. It's still unacceptable regardless and should be resolved. It's been a month this issue has been ongoing, other folks here have reported the issue to Verizon and still nothing is being done about it. I've been trying to get a route that isn't congested or less congested but every new route so far exhibits the same issues or similar issues.
Gaming is a hobby I do in my free time and is not my life. I live a very stressful life and gaming is my release at the end of the day.
--
My Website: »www.xtemu.com
My Speedtest: »www.speedtest.net/result/1218984197.png
|
|
rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
 ·Bright House
| reply to serge87
said by serge87:@Xtreme2 and serith: I also live outside of Syracuse and am having terrible timing out problems the last week or two. I'd say 1 out of 5 requests to almost any website time out 
My trace routes to Google, Craigslist and Reddit(notice the timeouts in hops 3-6):
Long post.... and on page 8 it's late in the game, but I really want to stop and shed some light on traceroutes and how they can be misinterpreted.
Timeouts at intermediate hops mean... pay attention... NOTHING. ICMP is low priority and there are many reasons a router might ignore ICMP if it's busy doing something more meaningful, like crunching BGP table updates. Same goes for high latency at INTERMEDIATE hops.
What matters is DESTINATION results. Is there packet loss to the destination? And is there abnormally high latency? Those are the questions that matter.
Something you cannot see, unless you control both endpoints, is REVERSE PATH. If you ride inbound on Verizon to a particular destination, there is no guarantee the return path will be symmetric-- i.e, that the response will come back to you on the same route. Quite often traffic will take another physical path-- or other carriers altogether.
Why? Traffic engineering at the other end. For example, datacenters often use route selection tools that route based on lowest economic cost, not necessarily lowest latency or best path. Many will balance traffic loads across their circuits. If they see too much traffic outbound on their (for example) Level3 transit, they may shift some of it to (example) Cogent or Telia or whatever carriers they have. OR-- they could route based on lowest cost, meaning they'll send the bulk of their OUTBOUND traffic via (for example) Cogent, while still announcing their prefixes (for inbound traffic) through their premium carriers. So never... NEVER, NEVER... assume to know the reverse path unless you can do a traceroute from the host at the other end.
Now, let's discuss the screenshot you posted. You're near Syracuse so we'll consider that in determining expected latency.
Your trace to google-- best guess on where that server is, is NYC. This one is tough to judge because there are so many possibilities for physical path (the actual fiber route), reverse path, etc. At mid-40 ms latency at hops 4-10, if nothing else it's consistent. Given your physical geography, I would not be entirely surprised if upstate NY Verizon fiber faced Boston (Syracuse -> BOS -> NYC) but without a fiber map it's anybody's guess.
Your trace to craigslit-- note that the servers are in Palo Alto. Assuming your physical path is similar to the google trace, meaning in the vicinity of 45 ms to hit NYC, then onto long-haul fiber across country, latency in the 120 ms range is not unreasonable.
Your trace to reddit-- destination server is in the Washington, D.C., area. Given 45 ms from you to NYC, another 10 ms from NYC->DC is not out of line.
Long post, yes. But so many people mis-interpret traceroutes and/or put too much emphasis on them, I felt it appropriate to pass it through a sanity filter. |
|
 nycdavePremium,MVM
join:1999-11-16
Melville, NY
kudos:10 | rebus9,
Great post. Hopefully some people will actually read it and understand what those of us 'in the know' have understood for years....
ICMP is lowest priority, and a standard outbound trace route can never tell the entire story. |
|
